this post was submitted on 07 Jul 2023
526 points (95.3% liked)

politics

19107 readers
2997 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

House Bill 2127 pre-empts municipalities from enacting legislation in eight areas—with predictable results.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] lynny@lemmy.world 24 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (20 children)

This bill bans local ordinances on water breaks, but there are still federal (and likely state) laws that still require it. You can see right on OSHA's site here.

https://www.osha.gov/faq

OSHA Standards require an employer to provide potable water in the workplace and permit employees to drink it. Potable water includes tap water that is safe for drinking. Employers cannot require employees to pay for water that is provided. An employer does not have to provide bottled water if potable water is available. See OSHA's sanitation standard for more information.

Why can't people report on GOP bills objectively, rather than misconstruing them as hard as possible?

[–] etceterar@kbin.social 24 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This "article" also doesn't mention a single death due to being deprived of a water break. There's zero mention of anyone asking for and being denied water. Some of the deaths were hikers. It's "water breaks were banned" and then "people died," and nobody's reading the article to find out those two statements are tied together for sensationalism alone. Nobody was denied a water break and died because of it. Lame journalism.

[–] ashok36@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago

The heat deaths highlight the danger of passing the law even if the law itself hasn't directly caused any deaths yet. It's like passing a law against yelling "Shark!" at the beach when there's a great white in the area.

"Oh but Mary was pulled under before anyone had noticed the shark in the first place. The law didn't contribute to her death at all." Technically true but... what the fuck are we doing guys?

load more comments (18 replies)